Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 75 posts

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#21

Post by EliRivers »

Scoundreller wrote: post #17
EliRivers wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if you're just transiting. Sterile transit just plain doesn't exist at US airports (or at least, didn't when I last checked, which was a few years ago - maybe things are different now?), so changing planes takes bloody hours instead of minutes, and requires going through exit procedures and then coming back through security.

Well, while going Canada->LHR->Schengen airport, I definitely had to go through UK security again, as well as passport control to connect to an "international" flight to France. I didn't even leave the terminal. "Everyone who boards an aircraft at Heathrow has to be security screened to UK government standards. Even if you've already been through security checks at another airport, we're obliged to screen you again b…

Fair enough. Maybe I'm spoiled by modern airports, which Heathrow definitely is not.

When I change at modern airports, usually in Europe, I very rarely have to go out and back in again. In Geneva[1], the layout of the airport was essentially reconfigured around me to let me walk from one plane to the next. I was the only person doing it; I walked through empty glass-walled corridors, watching through the glass as other passengers went their various ways, guided by wall displays pointing me towards the next flight (no other flights on it; just mine) and at one point I got to a train platform cut in half by a glass wall. The other side was a hundred or so people, and when the train came, I was in one half, and they were in the other. We were likewise segregated at the destination platform. I walked all the way to the departure lounge before I reached a person, whose job was to let me in and not let anyone in the lounge leave through my private entrance. It was basically how you'd expect a modern airport to work; to know who on each flight needed to leave and who needed to be guided to another flight, and for the displays and corridors to provide it.

[1] I think it was Geneva.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#22

Post by switch007 »

seszett wrote: post #15
switch007 wrote: post #7

"Passengers ... will need to get off at Lille, go up to the customs hall and in effect start their journey again. ... Even some of those who knew of the Lille stop were surprised to find they had to carry their luggage throughout" Who would want to do that? Not only that, the Marseille train leaves London at 07:19! Great for people in London, not so great if you live outside. Firstly, it might not be possible to get…

Your flight arrives at Marignane though, taxi to Marseille is around 40€ and half an hour. I don't know how long and expensive is the journey to London's airports.

I understand. It's a point often made - as if the other differences of travelling by train don't exist. For me, it's not any /more/ of a concern than the others, e.g:

- Departure: how to arrive, time, expense.

- Journey: duration, connections, time of day, day of week, comfort, baggage, expense.

- Arrival: distance from destination, time, expense.

I think arrival is less of a concern as you're quite likely to be going to the inner city, and in Europe it's almost a given that there are reliable and frequent connections to the city.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#23

Post by gpvos »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #14

I find it fascinating that much of the hold up is having multiple signalling systems for each country in their train. Is there a web site that talks about the different systems in some more detail? I've been following Caltrain's installation of new signalling (in theory to support more frequent trains and the high speed rail service) and was surprised to find them as complicated as they are.

Wikipedia isn't too bad on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Train_protection_syst... - and see my reply elsewhere on this page: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9631443

I would expect there to be a few real experts on HN, though. (I'm not one.)

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#24

Post by themartorana »

lordnacho wrote: post #10
protomyth wrote: post #2

"After 9/11 air travel started to become far more time-consuming - for reasons of security which no one would ever criticise. People used to say no-one wanted to be on a train for more than three hours but I think four would now be more accurate." I'm with you on the 4 hours, but I would be happy to criticize the security theater after 9/11.

I agree. And theater is the right word. I just don't believe that all those procedures, such as taking out your laptop, bagging liquids, and removing your shoes, are actually useful in improving safety. It's also incredibly stressful for the staff. I was in line in the US once and one lady had a meltdown. She saw the queue of people going around the corner and basically just threw her hands up and quit. The face on h…

They're not. In fact, they're a terrible distraction. They put everyone on edge, so it's much more difficult to spot one person acting oddly in the crowd. Shoes, laptops, and liquids rules are all reactions to a single events. Reactionary mouse traps that never get out ahead of the new mouse.

I'm not even sure what benefit it is to the government. I'd be more paranoid about silent security than easily avoidable theatre out in the open.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#25

Post by adevine »

guard-of-terra wrote: post #13
protomyth wrote: post #2

"After 9/11 air travel started to become far more time-consuming - for reasons of security which no one would ever criticise. People used to say no-one wanted to be on a train for more than three hours but I think four would now be more accurate." I'm with you on the 4 hours, but I would be happy to criticize the security theater after 9/11.

"no-one wanted to be on a train for more than three hours" Why is it so? People easily tolerate 3h on a plane, and trains are much more comfortable than planes (more space, free to roam). And you don't have to get to airport, get from airport, check in, wait for baggage. I would say 5 hours should be non-issue. "As a rail enthusiast I would love to see trains to Berlin or Milan or even Moscow. But realistically that…

Because past 3 hours the time/cost savings compared to air starts to look really unfavorable. Air travel has a high "fixed cost" (getting to the airport, going through security, picking up any checked luggage) but a low "variable cost" (it's much faster than a train), while the reverse is true for trains. Anything longer than 3-4 hours and the lower variable cost of air travel overcomes its higher fixed cost.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#26

Post by switch007 »

bnegreve wrote: post #19
switch007 wrote: post #7

"Passengers ... will need to get off at Lille, go up to the customs hall and in effect start their journey again. ... Even some of those who knew of the Lille stop were surprised to find they had to carry their luggage throughout" Who would want to do that? Not only that, the Marseille train leaves London at 07:19! Great for people in London, not so great if you live outside. Firstly, it might not be possible to get…

When I have to choose between a 2 hour flight and a 4 hours train ride, I choose the train. I hate airport security and I find it impossible to do anything in a plane. I agree that flying is generally cheaper though.

It's rarely a choice on that scale in/between England/Scotland, though. London-Scotland is ~4-5 hours on the train, or a 1h-1h15m flight.

EDIT: London-Manchester is probably a good example of a good and popular train journey. While other domestic flights over the years have lost out to rail, London-Scotland by plane has remained popular.

London-Paris is better, at 50 min flight vs 2 hour train.

By the way, I'm not arguing /against/ trains. I love trains and flying is such a hassle these days.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#27

Post by pjmlp »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #14

I find it fascinating that much of the hold up is having multiple signalling systems for each country in their train. Is there a web site that talks about the different systems in some more detail? I've been following Caltrain's installation of new signalling (in theory to support more frequent trains and the high speed rail service) and was surprised to find them as complicated as they are.

The track sizes and electricity are also problematic.

Portuguese and Spanish tracks have a smaller width than the rest of Europe.

So Portuguese trains only travel to Spain (the few that exist). And Spanish trains have a system where they can change the width between the wheels when going to France.

Similarly, trains travelling between Belgium and Germany, if I am not mistaken, have dual electricity system.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#28

Post by saool »

All trains from London are direct to Europe, even if they are local. I find the wording and the idea behind it as stupid as the trouble in Lille due to not being part of Schengen.

Signed: a Schengen national that hates and avoids lay-overs in Heathrow like the plague.

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#29

Post by gpvos »

seszett wrote: post #18
guard-of-terra wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"no-one wanted to be on a train for more than three hours" Why is it so? People easily tolerate 3h on a plane, and trains are much more comfortable than planes (more space, free to roam). And you don't have to get to airport, get from airport, check in, wait for baggage. I would say 5 hours should be non-issue. "As a rail enthusiast I would love to see trains to Berlin or Milan or even Moscow. But realistically that…

I have also taken a night train from Vienna to Paris (and then a regular TGV to La Rochelle). Night trains are wonderful, they save you a night at the hotel, and they basically make the journey take no effective time from your holidays... but SNCF wants to get rid of them entirely, or so I heard.

That must have been the official Orient Express, which was reduced from its original Paris-Istanbul route to Paris-Bucharest in 1977, then Paris-Vienna in 2001, Strasbourg-Vienna in 2007, and cancelled in 2009.

I thought it was DB who wanted to do away with them. But maybe SNCF too. Due to European railway regulation and thoughtless implementation of the same by the individual countries, international (night) trains have become quite expensive to run. (This in addition to the obvious factors of fast daytime TGVs and irresponsibly cheap airplane flights.)

Re: Direct Train to Europe: London to the Mediterranean

#30

Post by seszett »

switch007 wrote: post #22
seszett wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your flight arrives at Marignane though, taxi to Marseille is around 40€ and half an hour. I don't know how long and expensive is the journey to London's airports.

I understand. It's a point often made - as if the other differences of travelling by train don't exist. For me, it's not any /more/ of a concern than the others, e.g: - Departure: how to arrive, time, expense. - Journey: duration, connections, time of day, day of week, comfort, baggage, expense. - Arrival: distance from destination, time, expense. I think arrival is less of a concern as you're quite likely to be goin…

> in Europe it's almost a given that there are reliable and frequent connections to the city

Well I don't know... I live in France, and the lack of reliable, fast and cheap connections is exactly why I often take the train even when it's more expensive and slower.

The last time I arrived at Marignane, at 1am because the flight had been delayed by two hours or so, I had to wait for 1,5 hour, along with a few fellow passengers, for a shuttle to come even though it had been supposed to show up 20 minutes after we started waiting. The driver then explained us that "you're in Marseille, that's normal!". And he was kinda right. The shuttle was also late for the return flight, actually, just not too late.

Post reply on HN